Countries where authors publish in Journalism Practice
Since Specialization
Citations
This map shows the geographic impact of research published in Journalism Practice. It shows the number of citations coming from papers published by authors working in each country. You can also color the map by specialization and compare the number of citations received by papers published in Journalism Practice with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Journalism Practice more than expected).
This network shows the impact of papers published in Journalism Practice. Nodes represent research fields, and links connect fields that are likely to share authors. Colored nodes show fields that tend to cite the papers published in Journalism Practice.
About Journalism Practice
The 1.6k papers published in Journalism Practice in the last decades have received a total of 29.1k indexed citations . Papers published in Journalism Practice usually cover Communication (1.2k papers), Gender Studies (197 papers), Sociology and Political Science (666 papers), Literature and Literary Theory (132 papers) and Philosophy (94 papers) specifically the topics of Media Studies and Communication (1.0k papers), Social Media and Politics (627 papers), Public Relations and Crisis Communication (291 papers), Misinformation and Its Impacts (145 papers), Gender, Feminism, and Media (134 papers), Media Influence and Politics (114 papers), Radio, Podcasts, and Digital Media (103 papers) and Climate Change Communication and Perception (84 papers). The most active scholars publishing in Journalism Practice are Alfred Hermida, Jane B. Singer, Edson C. Tandoc, Ida Schultz, Arthur D. Santana, Marcel Broersma, Christer Clerwall, Arjen van Dalen, Steve Paulussen and Tim P. Vos.
Rankless uses publication and citation data sourced from OpenAlex, an open and comprehensive
bibliographic database. While OpenAlex provides broad and valuable coverage of the global
research landscape, it—like all bibliographic datasets—has inherent limitations. These include
incomplete records, variations in author disambiguation, differences in journal indexing, and
delays in data updates. As a result, some metrics and network relationships displayed in
Rankless may not fully capture the entirety of a scholar's output or impact.